The recent executive order directed federal agencies to exercise authority and discretion available to them to reduce potential burden. Consistent with that, the IRS has decided to make changes that would continue to allow electronic and paper returns to be accepted for processing in instances where a taxpayer doesn’t indicate their coverage status.
This notice extends the due date for certain 2016 information-reporting requirements for insurers, self-insuring employers, and certain other providers of minimum essential coverage under section 6055 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) and for applicable large employers under section 6056 of the Code. Specifically, this notice extends the due date for furnishing to individuals the 2016 Form 1095-B, Health Coverage, and the 2016 Form 1095-C, Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage, from January 31, 2017, to March 2, 2017. This notice also extends good-faith transition relief from section 6721 and 6722 penalties to the 2016 information-reporting requirements under sections 6055 and 6056.
Obama and the White House provided strong support for the Act. But others, such as Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and
Bernie Sanders (I-VT), believe that the provisions that may compromise the FDA’s ability to ensure the efficacy and safety of
medical products outweigh the law’s positives. We focus here on the potential changes the Act will have on the regulation of
medical products and the resulting effects on physician and patient trust in the safety and efficacy of those products. Consumers
need to be aware of these changes and must understand that the evidence required for drug approval may be less rigorous that
it has been in the past. This primarily affects newly approved drugs, or drugs with newly approved indications.
HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell gave a farewell address praising the accomplishments of the ACA, while President Barack Obama met with congressional
Democrats to cheer them on in resisting efforts to undermine it.
On January 20, 2017, the winds abruptly changed.Within minutes of his inauguration,President Donald Trump issued an executive order instructing departments
and agencies responsible for implementing the ACA, “to the maximum extent permitted by law,” to “waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision” of the ACA in order to minimize costs and regulatory burdens on the states, insurers, purchasers, providers, or medical product manufacturers; “provide greater flexibility to States”; and “encourage…a free and open market in interstate commerce for…healthcare services and health insurance.”
The Trump administration has taken few concrete actions affecting the ACA. Read more
That line appeared to be reinforced over the weekend when President Trump said, in a pre-Super Bowl interview, that the process could draw out into next year. My sense is that what Trump was talking about was the fact that the whole process, that includes implementing the replacement, could take well past 2017. Trump, never one for getting the details right, was taken literally by the press looking to write stories about how the whole process was foundering.
Speaker Paul Ryan quickly countered in his press briefing that Republicans will legislate a repeal and replace of Obamacare this year.
As I have reported to you a number of times, that process, especially the replace part, will be very difficult to achieve given the need to have at least eight Democrats onside with a complete replace bill.
On Friday, January 20, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order instructing the Secretary of
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the heads of all other federal agencies to
“exercise all authority and discretion available to them to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or
delay the implementation of any provision or requirement” of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that
would impose a fiscal or regulatory burden on individuals or families or any one of a number of other
stakeholders across the health care system including health insurers and purchasers of health
This Executive Order has no immediate impact on Anthem plans or our members’ benefits
and coverage. Read more:
As has been widely reported, President Trump issued an Executive Order addressing the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”)—but many of our clients are wondering what impact it has on them and the group health plans that they sponsor for their employees, because the language of the Executive Order only speaks to minimizing the economic burden of the ACA on individuals, families, healthcare providers, health insurers, and health insurance purchasers.
By its terms, the Executive Order does not specifically address employers. Further, implementation of the Executive Order involves several practical challenges, including the fact that the heads of the agencies overseeing the ACA have not been confirmed and that the Order is to be implemented consistent with applicable law—meaning that the agencies are not supposed to disregard the ACA while repeal or replacement legislative efforts are being undertaken.
So, what’s an employer to do?
Fixing Health Insurance Reform: The Only Way Republicans Can Lower Costs is to Provide Less Coverage?
Congress has begun the work of replacing the Affordable Care Act, and that means lawmakers will soon face the thorny dilemma that confronts every effort to overhaul health insurance: Sick people are expensive to cover, and someone has to pay.
That is right.
But, this statement would seem to infer, as I have observed the general discussion about fixing Obamacare has often inferred, that there is a certain cost to health insurance and that Republicans can rearrange the deck chairs any way they want but the cost will be the same.
What I think this story, and the general discussion about how to cover people in the future is missing, is that Obamacare is so flawed that by itself it is manufacturing plan premium levels that are at least 30% to 40% higher than they need to be.
Obamacare insurance exchanges cover only about 40% of those that are subsidy eligible, when the longstanding insurance industry underwriting rule calls for 75% of an eligible group to be covered in order to have enough healthy people enrolled to pay the costs of the sick. But again it is this critical point that is being missed.
What would happen if the plans were more attractive––if people saw value in them? And, if we had 75% of the eligible group signing up as a result, what impact would that have on current premiums?
I have asked a number of health plan actuaries that hypothetical question. Hypothetical because the health plans don’t have the flexibility to rearrange the product pieces so as to make the insurance plans more attractive.
Their answer has consistently been that prices could come down at least 30% to 40% from 2018 prices. Said another way, the anti-selection load the current Obamacare exchange plans are carrying is worth at least 30% to 40%. And, that makes sense. When Obamacare launched for 2014, the carriers conservatively priced for an acceptable claim level. The reality was much higher––2018 prices are now about 30% to 40% higher after adjusting for baseline trend.